HB 6696, AN ACT CONCERNING MUNICIPAL ETHICS
A Good Idea but Not For Everyone
It seems that every year or so the legislature takes a stab at advancing a model municipal ethics code. The idea is to create a one-size-fits-all code that will encompass all the provisions that a good ethics code should have:
• Conflicts of interest
• Financial interest disclosure
• Gift bans
• Confidentiality
• Use of position for personal gain
This year, the GAE Committee under the leadership of Rep. James Spallone, have proposed just such a bill and it is making its way through the legislative process. The bill requires towns to enact a code at least as strict as the model code by Oct. 1, 2010 and inform the Office of State Ethics that they have done so by January 15, 2011. Many of the smaller towns, who came out at the public hearing in protest over the bill, complained that this was a costly unfunded mandate like so many others foisted on them by the state. Here’s a link to the bill in its current form:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/FC/2009HB-06696-R000675-FC.htm
The idea is a good one, but unfortunately Connecticut’s towns are not one-size-fits-all. A recent survey by the CT Conference of Municipalities found that 124 of Connecticut’s 169 towns already have an ethics code in place. CCM also found that between 2005, when they last did the survey and 2008, the number of municipalities who have ethics codes increased by 35% which clearly shows a trend in the right direction. One might assume it is a reaction to the “Corrupticut” nickname our state has been given. Here’s a link to CCM’s testimony on the bill and summary of their survey:
http://tinyurl.com/dyd5md
The bottom line is our public officials need to resolve the patchwork quilt of ethics codes across the state’s cities and towns. Anyone doing business here is entering a morass of varying rules and regulations. But it isn’t fair to ask our small towns to develop cookie-cutter codes that have different meaning in their communities than they do in the larger cities, not to mention the financial burden of implementation. Is regionalization the answer? What do you think?
